World

by: Dave Lindorff / This Can’t Be Happening! Syrian civilians and children should count themselves lucky that mass opposition in the US, the UK and much of the rest of the world to the idea of a US bombing blitz aimed…

The Globe’s More Than 28-Year Warm Streak Continues (via Climate Central) By Andrew Freedman Follow @afreedma Continuing a more than 28-year unbroken streak of warmer-than-average conditions, August tied with 2005 as the fourth warmest such month on record worldwide, according…

As Washington swirls with proposals, counter-proposals, and political brinksmanship in response to diplomatic efforts on Syria, the situation has a lot of people scratching their heads. Couldn’t President Obama and Congress have handled this differently?

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Nearly three-quarters of MoveOn members are opposed to Congress authorizing the use of military force in Syria. The liberal organization is urging its eight million members to contact their Congressional representatives to persuade them to “vote no” on the use of military force in Syria.

Even if the President musters enough votes to strike Syria, at what political cost? Any president has a limited amount of political capital to mobilize support for his agenda, in Congress and, more fundamentally, with the American people. This is especially true of a president in his second term of office. Which makes President Obama’s campaign to strike Syria all the more mystifying.

Even if everything Secretary of State John Kerry says about chemical weapons in Syria were true, the evidence would prove only that Bashar al-Assad committed crimes against civilians. It would not prove that the U.S. government has either the moral or legal authority to commit acts of war.

For once, I would love to hear a government official reject a call to war because it is immoral; because we have greater needs here at home that require our attention and our funds; because we’re already $1 trillion poorer due to these endless, mindless wars; because America should not be policing the world; because we refuse to enrich the military industrial complex while impoverishing our nation; because endless wars will never result in peace; and because there are never any winners in war, only losers.